# Can anyone name any defensible, legitimate value to "voter suppression"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 8, 2004, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283 "2004-10-08T22:48:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/1 "2004-10-08T22:48:08Z")
In the following recent GD threads – “Jimmy Carter: Basic requirements for a fair election are missing in Florida” > **[Jimmy Carter: Basic requirements for a fair election are missing in Florida](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=278130)** > > From the Washington Post, September 27, 2004, by former President Jimmy Carter, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52800-2004Sep26.html (registration required but free); also available at the website of the Carter Center,... “Republican voter intimidation tactics” > **[Republican voter intimidation tactics](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277079)** > > What about supporting democracy in our own country? From Salon (http://www.salon.com) – The report by People for the American Way is here – http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368 “Right-wingers trying to block college-student voter-registration drives” > **[Right-wingers trying to block college-student voter-registration drives](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277926)** > > From the website of the Feminist Majority Foundation, http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=8629: The really disturbing part is that the Pima County Recorder actually appeared on that Fox News report and backed up their position,... “Why would anyone oppose requiring an ID to vote?” > **[Why would anyone oppose requiring an ID to vote?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277531)** > > Why would a requirement for ID affect minorities more than non-minorities? Wouldn’t this just be a way to preent fraud? http://www.kfmb.com/topstory29457.html – we have been discussing a wide range of dirty tricks employed (mostly) by Republicans in recent elections, and the impending one, transparently designed to “suppress the vote” – that is, to prevent persons not likely to vote for the suppressing party from getting registered in the first place; or to discount their registration on technical grounds; or to dissuade them (usually via veiled threats) from turning out on election day. So far, some posters on these threads have defended the tactics in question as having been misrepresented, and not really intended to suppress voters; or, as being calculated to achieve arguably legitimate ends, such as keeping persons from voting who are not lawfully qualified to vote (e.g., non-citizens, non-residents of the state where they might vote, or ex-felons, who in some states are legally disqualified). But nobody – yet – has actually argued for any positive value in voter-suppression tactics, nor that such are “fair play” in any sense. I take it as an axiom of democracy that **high voter turnout is always a good thing.** If you believe in democracy, then you have to believe that 100% voter turnout – participation of all legally eligible citizens in the electoral process – is an invaluable **end in itself,** regardless of what electoral results it produces. It is a goal all of us, regardless of party affiliation or ideology, must always strive to achieve even if we never quite get there. And **any** attempt, however subtle, to discourage voter turnout must be classed as a dirty trick. (And should be criminalized, too, in all cases where we can criminalize it without violating the First Amendment!) Does any Doper care to dispute this? To argue that low voter turnout is ever a good thing? Or that it is “fair play” to not only strive to encourage your own side’s voter base to turn out to vote, but to strive to discourage your opponents base from voting? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/2 "2004-10-08T23:01:21Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Does any Doper care to dispute this? To argue that low voter turnout is ever a good thing? Or that it is “fair play” to not only strive to encourage your own side’s voter base to turn out to vote, but to strive to discourage your opponents base from voting? Erm, I think I could form an argument that low voter turnout is a good thing if the higher turnout is based on something silly (like free doughnuts or something) or is entirely made up of really stupid people who have no real interest in the vote. Would that count as disputing your point? As for discouraging your opponents, that’s fair game if and only if, it’s a debating-type discouragement and not a waving-a-gun-in-your-face-type discouragment. In other words, “Jehosephat, you don’t really want to vote, do ya, old buddy old pal?” is fair game. “Jehosephat, if you vote I’m killing your apidistra!” isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/3 "2004-10-08T23:09:08Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > If you believe in democracy, then you have to believe that 100% voter turnout – participation of **all legally eligible citizens** in the electoral process… The bolded bit above is what many Republicans are concerned with, and it only in line with that concern that I have seen any sort of electoral issues raised by Republicans. You see, there have been a wide range of dirty tricks employed (mostly) by Democrats in many elections, and the impending one, transparently designed to “steal elections” – that is, paying the homeless to vote, voting on behalf of dead people, voting a few times (Vote early, vote often?), getting illegal immigrants to vote, et cetera. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/4 "2004-10-08T23:18:02Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Erm, I think I could form an argument that low voter turnout is a good thing if the higher turnout is based on something silly (like free doughnuts or something) or is entirely made up of really stupid people who have no real interest in the vote. Would that count as disputing your point? Yes, it would. And I would counter by saying: 1. “Really stupid people” have as much right to vote as anyone else. It’s their government too, and they are affected by public-policy decisions. Citizens of a democracy are not allowed to vote so they can give the body politic the benefit of their wisdom, such as it is. They are allowed to vote so they can defend their own interests. They are allowed to vote so they can make their **will** known and, to some limited extent, acted upon. 2. It is for the voter, nobody else, to decide whether he or she has any “real interest” in the matter being voted upon. 3. I so no harm in offering people petty bribes such as donuts to do what is their civic duty in any case. The secret-ballot system makes sure bribes large or small can’t actually be used to buy votes – because the briber has no way of knowing how a given bribed voter actually voted. Funny you should mention the donuts thing. From Michael Moore’s website – [http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-10-06:](http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-10-06:) > [@](#): > > Wednesday, October 6th, 2004 > > **Republicans, Out of Ideas, Ask Prosecutors to Arrest Michael Moore** > > 10/6/04 > > Dear Friends, > > You may have heard by now that the Michigan Republican Party has called for my arrest. That’s right. They literally want me brought up on charges – and hope that I’m locked up. > > No, I’m not kidding. The Republican Party, yesterday, filed a criminal complaint with the prosecutors in each of the counties where I spoke last week in Michigan. > > My crime? Clean underwear for anyone who will vote in the upcoming election. > > Each night on our 60-city “Slacker Uprising Tour” through the 20 battleground states, I’ve been registering hundreds (and on some nights, thousands) of voters at my arena and stadium events. I then ask for everyone over 23 who has never voted (or didn’t vote in the last election) to stand up. I tell these slackers that I understand and respect why they think politicians are not worth the bother. I tell them that I may have been the original slacker, and that I do not want them to change their slacker ways. Keep sleeping 'til noon! Keep drinking beer! Stay on the sofa and watch as much TV as possible! But, please, just for me, on 11/2, I want you to leave the house and give voting a try – just this once. The stakes this time are just too high. > > If they promise me that they’ll do this, I give the guys a 3-pack of new Fruit of the Loom underwear, and the women get a day’s supply of Ramen noodles, the sustenance of slackers everywhere. > > I then close by having them repeat the 2004 Slacker Oath: “Pick nose! Pick butt! Pick Kerry.” > > It seems to have worked, as each night the volunteer tables are swamped afterwards with hundreds of new and young voters signing up to campaign for regime change for the next four weeks. > > The satire of all this seems to have been lost on the Republicans. Or maybe it hasn’t. The state of Michigan (where we spent most of last week) reported that over 100,000 young people recently registered to vote, a record that no one saw coming. The Slacker Tour has turned into a huge steamroller with a momentum all its own. > > So, the Republican Party, to show their gratitude that so many young people will now be involved in our system, has demanded that I be sent to jail for trying to “bribe” students to vote. > > Of course, this would be quite laughable if they weren’t so serious about their charges. But they are. I may soon be a wanted man in Michigan – simply because I convinced a few slackers to change their underwear and eat a healthy meal of artificially flavored noodles. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/5 "2004-10-08T23:30:48Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Yes, it would. And I would counter by saying: > > 1. “Really stupid people” have as much right to vote as anyone else. It’s their government too, and they are affected by public-policy decisions. Citizens of a democracy are not allowed to vote so they can give the body politic the benefit of their wisdom, such as it is. They are allowed to vote so they can defend their own interests. They are allowed to vote so they can make their **will** known and, to some limited extent, acted upon. You asked if it can be better to have low turnout. If there are only three people who actually know what the vote is even about and twenty who are going to pick something randomly, it would be better, probably, if the twenty didn’t bother to show up. I didn’t even hint that they didn’t have a “right” to vote, just that at times, yes, it would be better if people didn’t vote stupidly, or ignorantly. Because this is a debate about a hypothetical, I can’t provide real-world examples. > [@](#): > > 1. It is for the voter, nobody else, to decide whether he or she has any “real interest” in the matter being voted upon. Which is why I despise the idea that people should be shamed into voting. And, again, if this is a hypothetical, there would be times when I would hope the idiots would stay at home. There would be times when I, having an equal claim to idiocy, should stay at home. > [@](#): > > 1. I so no harm in offering people petty bribes such as donuts to do what is their civic duty in any case. The secret-ballot system makes sure bribes large or small can’t actually be used to buy votes – because the briber has no way of knowing how a given bribed voter actually voted. If people are showing up to vote because they are going to get a pastry, I think the world would be safer if they just got them in the mail. You asked if I thought low voter turnout is ever good. I think it very much could be, under specific circumstances that only exist in a theoretical universe. Because, as it stands, we can’t tell the idiot from the visionary. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/6 "2004-10-08T23:48:17Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > The bolded bit above is what many Republicans are concerned with, and it only in line with that concern that I have seen any sort of electoral issues raised by Republicans. > > You see, there have been a wide range of dirty tricks employed (mostly) by Democrats in many elections, and the impending one, transparently designed to “steal elections” – that is, paying the homeless to vote, voting on behalf of dead people, voting a few times (Vote early, vote often?), getting illegal immigrants to vote, et cetera. Cite? BTW, “paying the homeless to vote” is not a “dirty trick” unless the homeless persons in question are non-citizens or otherwise legally ineligible. (Lack of a permanent street address does **not** make them legally ineligible.) ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/7 "2004-10-08T23:59:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Cite? > > BTW, “paying the homeless to vote” is not a “dirty trick” unless the homeless persons in question are non-citizens or otherwise legally ineligible. (Lack of a permanent street address does **not** make them legally ineligible.) Paying _anyone_ to vote, even if it’s only payment in underwear or noodles, is generally frowned upon, as it can be seen as a form of attempting to subvert the voter through bribery. I’m all for encouraging all eligible voters to get off their lazy butts and vote, but not for material reward. Let the mercenary bastards stay home. Neither party can claim never to have engaged in questionable practices around election time; that the Republicans seem to have elevated it to a new level in Florida and elsewhere strikes me more as a result of greater opportunity than of fewer scruples. Which is not to say that what’s going on in Florida in particular – and various other states as well – is therefore excuseable. The suppressed voter rolls, polling station shenanigans, and (worst of all) electronic voting systems all need to opposed by all people of good conscience, party notwithstanding. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2004, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/8 "2004-10-09T21:21:54Z")
I’m still waiting for your cite, **Brutus.** The abuses you describe – the same person voting more than once, casting votes on behalf of dead people, etc. – are things I’ve heard of, but they date from the long-gone days of urban machine politics. Can you cite any proven instance from the past 10 or 20 years? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/9 "2004-10-10T00:18:27Z")
Funnily enough, casting votes on behalf of the recently deceased apparently still goes on in – can you guess? – Florida. Unfornately my cite ([http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566688](http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566688)) has just gone into paid subscription mode, dammit, so unless I can find another source you’ll just have to take my word for it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/10 "2004-10-10T00:31:12Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Funnily enough, casting votes on behalf of the recently deceased apparently still goes on in – can you guess? – Florida. > > Unfornately my cite ([http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566688](http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566688)) has just gone into paid subscription mode, dammit, so unless I can find another source you’ll just have to take my word for it. If not a cite, can you provide more details? What election? What county? Who is supposedly to blame? ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/11 "2004-10-10T00:57:32Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I’m still waiting for your cite, **Brutus.** The abuses you describe – the same person voting more than once, casting votes on behalf of dead people, etc. – are things I’ve heard of, but they date from the long-gone days of urban machine politics. Can you cite any proven instance from the past 10 or 20 years? [Illegal immigrants voting.](http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20040923-104542-8488r.htm) [Bribing voters and voting twice.](http://www.sptimes.com/News/111500/Election2000/Trouble_is_all_around.shtml) I am not here to argue the merits of the claims. I am saying that if we had a clear, concise, and _verifiable_ voting and voter registration process, the problems simply wouldn’t exist. Unfortunately, it seems that whenever the issue is raised, all we get are impassioned crys of ‘Voter suppression!’, instead of any productive results. Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be voting, right? Nor should people vote twice or the dead vote at all, right? And people shouldn’t be bribed to vote one way or the other, right? There is a simple solution to all that: Prove who you are when registering and when voting. Heck, I have to prove who I am when using my credit card to buy something at the store, why not when carrying out my fundemental civic duty? I know, I know, ‘But not everybody can afford a $30.00 ID Card!’ Then the state picks up the tab. Simple. One man, one vote. And I suppose if you simply _must_ let women vote, give them one vote as well. (Each, not collectively!) 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/12 "2004-10-10T01:03:00Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > There is a simple solution to all that: Prove who you are when registering and when voting. Heck, I have to prove who I am when using my credit card to buy something at the store, why not when carrying out my fundemental civic duty? I know, I know, ‘But not everybody can afford a $30.00 ID Card!’ My state will accept a utility bill with your address on it. (For voting. As far as I know, there is still no ID requirement for registration. Could be wrong.) P.S. I wrote ‘vote early, vote often’ on the calendar in the kitchen at work for November 2nd. One guy thought I was serious! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/13 "2004-10-10T01:37:58Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > [Illegal immigrants voting.](http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20040923-104542-8488r.htm) > > [Bribing voters and voting twice.](http://www.sptimes.com/News/111500/Election2000/Trouble_is_all_around.shtml) Well, those cites don’t support what you said in your earlier post. The first, from the _Washington Times,_ merely discusses the possibility that illegal aliens **might** vote in in the absence of preventive safeguards; it does not cite any evidence that any such aliens have voted or are planning to vote in November, and it certainly does not say Democrats have been **encouraging** illegals to vote. (N.B.: If Democrats or a nonpartisan grass-roots organization were to run a get-out-the-vote drive in a Latino neighborhood, that is **not** encouraging illegals to vote.) The second cite, Howard Troxler’s column from 2000, mentions a couple of admitted double-votes by students at Marquette Universtiy in Wisconsin, and a Gore supporter in Milwaukee who might be charged with “bribing” homeless voters with cigarettes to get them to the polls. (As I’ve said before in this thread, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that last, nor with Michael Moore’s underwear and Ramen noodles.) Pretty thin stuff. And there’s nothing at all in either cite about dead people voting. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/14 "2004-10-10T01:44:38Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And there’s nothing at all in either cite about dead people voting. He forgot the link to John Edward’s web site. “I’m feeling a negative sense about a plant. Did your loved one have a bad experience with a plant? A green plant? About waist high? It’s a very negative feeling. Your loved one wants Kerry to win.” ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/15 "2004-10-10T02:20:39Z")
Like I mentioned, **Mr.Glutton** , I am not interested in playing dueling cites. Regardless of what the esteemed Mssr.Carter may have to say about the matter, I have my own doubts about the lefts claims of ‘voter intimidation’. But how would that affect making sure that one citizen gets one vote? How does ensuring honest registration and voting equate ‘voter intimidation’? My pet theory is that a certain party does not want a honest and verifiable voting and registration process because it eliminates a whole bag of tricks from their armory. But hey, that’s just a theory. Regardless, we have a pretty dated and patched-together voting process in this country. Certainly it could use modernization. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/16 "2004-10-10T02:52:35Z")
> [@](#): > > **Gyrate** : Let the mercenary bastards stay home. Well, see…that’s a problem, Gyrate. They’re _home_less. > [@](#): > > _Brutus_: But how would that affect making sure that one citizen gets one vote? How does ensuring honest registration and voting equate ‘voter intimidation’? If it is _honest_ registration and _legal_ voting practices, it doesn’t. Maybe we are after the same goal after all. It is a very strange and infuriating to be a political activist, register to vote, and then not be able to vote in an election that really matters to you – especially when you are a “long-haired hippy type” in the 1970’s. That happened to my first husband. When he complained at the Election Commission, he was treated like he was scum. (The irony is that it was by aids who supported the person he would have voted for and for whom I had served as a fund-raising hostess in a previous incarnation. And they were Democrats. It _has_ happened on both sides even though this situation is just anecdotal.) > [@](#): > > My pet theory is that a certain party does not want a honest and verifiable voting and registration process because it eliminates a whole bag of tricks from their armory. But hey, that’s just a theory. Regardless, we have a pretty dated and patched-together voting process in this country. Certainly it could use modernization. Then we are so in agreement. _Both_ sides in this election should be protected in every state. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/17 "2004-10-10T03:03:05Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Like I mentioned, **Mr.Glutton** , I am not interested in playing dueling cites. Regardless of what the esteemed Mssr.Carter may have to say about the matter, I have my own doubts about the lefts claims of ‘voter intimidation’. But how would that affect making sure that one citizen gets one vote? How does ensuring honest registration and voting equate ‘voter intimidation’? > > My pet theory is that a certain party does not want a honest and verifiable voting and registration process because it eliminates a whole bag of tricks from their armory. But hey, that’s just a theory. Regardless, we have a pretty dated and patched-together voting process in this country. Certainly it could use modernization. I agree entirely. See my recent thread – “Why not have a national ID card?” – [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277773](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277773). One reason I like the idea is that a national ID card, encoding **all** information relevant to any person’s business with any government entity, federal, state, or local, could provide a basis for a national standardization and regularization of our voting-registration system and our balloting system. A national ID card could reflect your status as a citizen or noncitizen, and also your status as a licensed or unlicensed driver, etc., etc. And every person who holds such a card and is legally eligible to vote would **be** a registered voter, **automatically,** at her or her most recent residence of record. No actual registration process required! But that’s not what this thread is about. This thread is about the suppression or discouragement of legally eligible voters – which has been, for the most part, a Republcian, not a Democratic, sin. (E.g., see “Bullies at the Voting Booth,” by Anne-Marie Cusac, an article in the October 2004 issue of _The Progressive_ – [http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html](http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html). Apparently, this year the Pubbies have plans in motion to suppress the potentially Democratic vote in **every** swing state.) So what do you have to say about that? Is voter suppression as defined above ever a **good** thing? And why? ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/18 "2004-10-10T03:39:09Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But that’s not what this thread is about. This thread is about the suppression or discouragement of legally eligible voters – which has been, for the most part, a Republcian, not a Democratic, sin. (E.g., see “Bullies at the Voting Booth,” by Anne-Marie Cusac, an article in the October 2004 issue of _The Progressive_ – [http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html](http://www.progressive.org/oct04/cusac1004.html). Apparently, this year the Pubbies have plans in motion to suppress the potentially Democratic vote in **every** swing state.)… But look at what Anne-Marie Cusac is calling ‘intimidation’! Come on. If you were talking about gangs of club-wielding thugs keeping people away from the polls, that’s one thing. We are talking about someone complaining at every attempt to verify the eligibility of a voter; like every ID request ‘disenfranchises’ some Haitian or something. So far, all I see is an attempt by the left to keep open the door to shady voting behavior, not an attempt to stave off Jim Crow II. (Some choice and telling excerpts) > [@](#): > > On the ballot in Arizona this November is a Republican-authored referendum called Protect Arizona Now or Proposition 200, which would do several things, including requiring proof of citizenship for anyone registering to vote. > [@](#): > > The ID requirement [in Missouri], says Hickey, is a new law aimed at the black vote. > [@](#): > > Although Nevada law does allow for voter challenges when a challenger has personal information about a voter’s citizenship or place of residence, “it becomes problematic when people are using this strategically, in a partisan way.” For instance, he says, “it would certainly be improper if they picked out the names of Latinos.” > [@](#): > > In August, a group comprised mostly of Republicans filed a suit claiming that people who were registering for the first time through a third party voter registration group, such as ACORN, should have to show IDs when they voted. The group said it was worried about voter fraud. Democrats said the Republicans were trying to disenfranchise voters. > [@](#): > > Nonetheless, Republicans introduced legislation that Sells characterizes as “voter suppression.” The legislation requires South Dakotans to show a picture ID in order to vote or else write up an affidavit. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/19 "2004-10-10T03:45:52Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > But look at what Anne-Marie Cusac is calling ‘intimidation’! Come on. If you were talking about gangs of club-wielding thugs keeping people away from the polls, that’s one thing. We are talking about someone complaining at every attempt to verify the eligibility of a voter; like every ID request ‘disenfranchises’ some Haitian or something. > > So far, all I see is an attempt by the left to keep open the door to shady voting behavior, not an attempt to stave off Jim Crow II. > > (Some choice and telling excerpts) Please expand on that. What, precisely, is your objection to any of those “telling excerpts”? Since we don’t have a national ID card, and since African-Americans are less likely than others to have driver’s licenses or state-issued ID cards (we’ve had threads on that question, see the OP), legislation requiring ID for voting in Missouri clearly **is** aimed at suppressing the black vote. So is any plan to have “poll-watchers” in black or low-income precincts to require voters to present ID or proof of citizenship, in states or jurisdictions where that is **not** required by law. And look at the end of Cusac’s article: > [@](#): > > Additional efforts to suppress the vote are bound to happen in the last week of the campaign and on Election Day itself. Then, it will be almost impossible to remedy the situation. > > Jim Gardner, communications director for the Missouri Democratic Party, describes some of the tactics that he says have happened in his state during past elections: “Videotaping people as they’re coming into the polling place. Parking near a polling place in a Crown Victoria with a couple of guys in dark suits. . . . A whisper campaign that everyone trying to vote who has outstanding traffic tickets will be arrested.” Gardner, who says the party had reports of such occurrences in 2000, says the Missouri Democrats have also heard stories in past elections of people handing out flyers in Democratic precincts that say, “Don’t forget to vote on Wednesday, November 4,” when the election is Tuesday, November 3. > > If groups start trying to suppress the vote a month out from the election, says Greenbaum of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, “it gives people like us plenty of opportunity to react.” Whereas, if voter suppression happens just before or the day of the election, “it’s actually more likely to be effective.” > > Greenbaum’s organization faxed me a series of signs that have appeared in Democratic precincts on or near election day. One sign, which appeared in Baltimore in 2002, is entirely in capital letters. “URGENT NOTICE,” it reads. "COME OUT TO VOTE ON NOVEMBER 6th. BEFORE YOU COME TO VOTE MAKE SURE YOU PAY YOUR > > - PARKING TICKETS > > - MOTOR VEHICLE TICKETS > > - OVERDUE RENT > > AND MOST IMPORTANT > > ANY WARRANTS" > > A second sign, this one from 1996, uses a tiny font to inform prospective voters that they may get into trouble when they walk into the booth. "Thanks to advances in computer technology Voting Machines can now be equipped with computers inside. The computers can be connected to a phone line to Federal State, and Local government agencies to instantly check if a voter is: > > A NON-CITIZEN > Wanted on Criminal or Traffic Warrants or Parole or Probation violations > Is behind on child support payments > Is cheating on Welfare, Food Stamps, AFDC, Section 8 or Medicaid by earning money ‘off the books’ > Has defaulted on government-backed student loans > Has failed to file income taxes for two or more years." > In late August, People for the American Way and the NAACP released a report entitled, “The Long Shadow of Jim Crow: Voter Intimidation and Suppression in America Today.” “In every national American election since Reconstruction, every election since the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965, voters–particularly African American voters and other minorities–have faced calculated and determined efforts at intimidation and suppression,” says the report. However, it describes recent voter suppression tactics as “more subtle, cynical, and creative” than “the poll taxes, literacy tests, and physical violence of the Jim Crow era.” > > Jim Crow is still casting a very long shadow. **That’s** the kind of thing I’m challenging you to defend, **Brutus.** If you can. ---
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283/20 "2004-10-10T04:29:37Z")
The NAACP should have acted on all this on March 2000, not November 8, 2000, after the election. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-name-any-defensible-legitimate-value-to-voter-suppression/268283.md?page=2)